Archive | Philosophies RSS feed for this section

Designing the News

10 May

Designing the news has a wonderful exploration of the use of data visualizations (my biggest boner) and an even wider array of sci-fi-y goodness. But this particular article focused on user interface displays, and just how crazy they’re going to get. Right now there’s a bajillion or so prototypes and most movies taking place in the future have wonderfully creative hypothetical interfaces, btu I really can’t wait to see what’s coming up next. Smartphones…touch screens…interactive projections. It looks like we’re going to have to start living longer just to be able to keep up with learning all these new ways to interact with information. From the table of contents to these.


The Sliding Scale of “Fine” and “Commercial” Artists

10 May

I Love Dyske. I have previously posted this. This article, discussing the difference between fine and commercial art really described an ongoing dilemma for most designers of today: what are you doing this for? zFor a lot of people, it is for the financial benefits. And not every field of work questions why it’s making money, so that’s great. SOme people think that is not so great that money is a motivator and do it just because they have to. In his writings, Dyske describes how everyone is a little bit of both fine and commercial artists and how the difference is having something to say rather than needing to be heard. It’s a lovely piece.

What a fantastic way of describing design

10 May

Design can be many things, but I have never before seen it so well laid out:

2D: lives in the x-y axis including graphic design and images
3D: lives in the x-y-z axis with products
4D: when you add the human element you get systems, services, and experiences
5D: and when you apply this over time, you get the 5th dimension of strategy

Thank you, Sami Nerenberg.

Branding and the eye

10 May

Colors have always been fascinating for me as an individual, and for the field of designers as a whole. Color theory is not only beautiful because of it’s fluidity to your eyes, it also has some of my own personal preferences to be considered well-thought out: good math and balance. Color theory is a science, just not a very complex one. This scientific nature allows it to work universally and to be accepted by all humans (we are, after all, biological creatures). The 12-part color wheel is essential to branding because it’s proportionate balances allow everyone to understand the same message even though chances are, we’re not really seeing the same colors. This wonderfully succinct article on color theory is essential for any designer to effective communicate.

Principles of good design.

10 May

Sign DeClimb is all about the conceptualization, the cleverness, and the innovation of fusing outdoor adventures with indoor safety. These design principles are not only a confidence booster, they help any designer focus a little more on what they are up to on all ends of the spectrum. Sign DeClimb may soon be posting their own rules of design!

Hope for the future

10 May

Here’s another gem from design sojourn. Short and sweet. I desperately hope that professional and personal projects start coming together for me very soon. Even for students, who don’t necessarily have the strict limitations of a “professional” project, feel incredibly limited by assignments and time outside of classwork (especially if you have a part-time crap job on top of that)

Justifying designs

10 May

Here’s an interesting debate. In my opinion, design is all about the thought process, the conscientiousness, the why. In this article from design sojourn, they say that not validating your work (especially to people outside of the field) can be good for your credibility, and your confidence. Not only is it hard for me to get the not explaining myself, I worry that people will stop having the reasons for why. This is a similar conflict found in the debate of modernism-postmodernism, and a concerning one at that. Can you trust people to do the details when they don’t have to explain them to you?

In the article, it says if you can justify it, you don’t need to be meek or explanatory. I think people confuse confidence in good with with cockiness for poor work.
But that’s just me.